Why was .223 chosen for our military...

IShootBack
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 70
(1/25/03 6:52:51 pm)
Reply Why was .223 chosen for our military...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, it has proven in every conflict that it is not effective at one shot kills.

Why did the military choose this whimpy round when the formidable .308 was available in the same platform?

Why don't they give our fighting men (and women) something they can rely on for one shot stoppong power?
Guns cause crime, like spoons made Rosie fat

270abolt
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 247
(1/25/03 8:07:02 pm)
Reply Re: !....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20 lbs of .223 is a bunch more of rounds than 20 lbs of .308 or other larger cal.................

Fairly long range and light recoil.................

Please don't call the ones that allow us to sleep in our own beds at night........ sissys............

teehee1
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 507
(1/25/03 10:20:13 pm)
Reply
GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My son the Marine tells me there is serious consideration for the return to the 7.62x51 Nato Rd. (.308 Winchester) The gun proposed may be the son of the M14/M1A, that would be too cool (It has not been publicized but there were problems with hitting power/trajectories in Afghanistan)
"Life is not:easy, fair or cheap... sometimes bad things happen to good people"

outdoorsman260
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 98
(1/25/03 10:32:29 pm)
Reply Re: GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another thing that i've been wondering. Why do we use Full Metal Jacket bullets.

will270win
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 186
(1/25/03 11:55:32 pm)
Reply Re: GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call me sissy all you want, I can tote that rifle or any other you give to me along with my pack, flak jacket, 782 gear, optics, and whatever else I might need. Sounding like the term sissy don't fit? I was handed the rifle, didn't choose it.

Wanna fight about it?

kdub01
*TFF Senior Staff*
Posts: 1908
(1/26/03 12:17:55 am)
Reply Re: GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Along with all the discussion about weight, more available ammo, tumbling effect of high velocity unstable bullets, yada, yada, one salient fact stood out - there was no need for cartridges capable to 1000 yd effective range.

The "Spray and Pray" syndrome swept the military (hence, the phasing out of bullseye formal target shooting) and it was determined the "Assault" type of firearm was that which fitted the concept of modern warfare. Germany started it, Russia improved upon it, the Chicom's in Korea exemplified it and the Iron Curtain countries all switched to it. The NATO countries had little choice but to counter it. The M14 and FAL in 7.62 NATO resulted. Not content to let sleeping dogs lie (the US recognized the need for CONTROLLED full auto (the M14 is notorious for uncontrolled accuracy in the full auto mode) fire, it was determined the lighter weight bullet gave less recoil and therefore, better control. More ammo per pound was one of the side benefits. The unstable tumbling bullet was another. Effective combat range to 400 meters was obtained. What more do you want - the best of all worlds!!

Sorta miss the firepower and range of the M1, my training rifle, tho.
"Keep Off The Ridgeline"

I read recently that some special forces units are already using to the 7.62.

I heard a debate of sorts on the History Channel where they were talking about Somilia and Afghanastan. One guy was a retired general who felt strongly that we would not have had the problems we faced in somolia if our boys had a gun that would stop the rebels. The rebels were not afraid of the American guns because of the light round and failure to stop with one shot. In Afghanastan, they have had the same problem. This is compounded by the multiple layers of clothing they wear over there. Apparently, many taliban had been shot without bullet penetration whatsoever.

I agree, get our fighting boys a round they can depend on to stop an opposing soldier and stop with the sissiy spray and pray mathod.

Guns cause crime, like spoons made Rosie fat

AGunguy
*TFF Staff*
Posts: 3206
(1/26/03 1:09:50 pm)
Reply Re: GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the most formindable rifles was used in the civil war. The musket with the four or five hundred grain soft lead hollowbase mini ball was terrible man waster. Responsible for loss of life, or loss of arms or legs, other body parts that the victim died from loss of blood from such horrendous wound channels.

Though, I don't advocate reissuing the single shot musket it was one mean shooting machine.

Gunguy

Yabra Kadabra Doo
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 151
(1/26/03 2:24:35 pm)
Reply Re: GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Studies done during WWII and the Korean War showed that most soldiers will NOT stick their heads up in a firefight to take an accurate shot. Pray and spray was not foisted on soldiers, it was the result of soldiers refusing to do what it takes to take the one killing shot.

.308 ammo is hard to control on full auto. .223 is much easier and 20 lbs of .223 adds up to a LOT more bullets. During Vietnam, M14 production was poor, and the Army started issueing M1 Garands again, but in the jungle, both of those weapons were considered too heavy to be slogging around in the swamps all day with. They probably should have gone with the ArmaLite Model 10 (which used the NATO 7.62×51 round) instead of the AR-15 (M-16), but thus is politics.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Responsible for loss of life, or loss of arms or legs, other body parts that the victim died from loss of blood from such horrendous wound channels.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It also started a rennaissance in hospital building. Hard to tell how many lives would have been saved under modern medical procedures (instead of just amputating everything that bled).

IShootBack
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 72
(1/26/03 4:37:12 pm)
Reply Re: GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From what I read, the new .308 the military is looking at does not have full auto mode. It has 1 round or 3 shot burst selection capability.
Another model, would be issued at 2 per squad, would have full auto mode, 1 or 3 shot burst.
Guns cause crime, like spoons made Rosie fat

Yabra Kadabra Doo
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 153
(1/26/03 9:49:49 pm)
Reply Re: GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A .308 on full auto is a waste of bullets.

1952Sniper
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 977
(1/27/03 8:38:59 am)
Reply | Edit Re: GOOD NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It sounds to me like the Russians got it right by designing a weapon that was a compromise between the two. The SKS and AK series in 7.62x39 was mild enough to allow a controlled full-auto burst, but packed enough punch to get the job done. No, it's not the most powerful round, but it'll beat the .223 any day.

I'm glad to hear that our military might be going to the 7.62 NATO round.
Macht kaputt, was euch kaputt macht!

Chas
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 140
(1/27/03 11:25:23 am)
Reply one shot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I heard one general explain that the .223 was not meant to produce a kill in the torso area. The .223, he said, was designed for and most effective when fired into the hip and groin area. A shot here would almost always immobilize the enemy and more times than not cause massive bleeding. He blamed the lack of effectiveness of the .223 on training and not the round.

chuck

kdub01
*TFF Senior Staff*
Posts: 1919
(1/27/03 1:26:14 pm)
Reply Re: one shot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a combat situation, most shooters tend to shoot high - why this General thought soldiers would be making hits in the hip or groin area is beyond me. Sounds like a lame excuse to alibi a bad choice of cartridge for the military.

Of course, the US has never been on the cutting edge of military individual firearm technology, anyway. Since we've been a nation and have fielded a military, we've always followed in the wake of other nations in such development.

I would concur we need to rethink the arming of the groundpounder with something a little more lethal to get the job done with the first round - not having to have multiple hits to down a target. Understand a lot of the Special Forces are re-equipping themselves with the .45 ACP as well.
"Keep Off The Ridgeline"

jimmar
Member
Posts: 13
(1/27/03 7:29:15 pm)
Reply Re:One Shot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Being a former "groundpounder" circa 69-71. I know from experience even a "sissy" m16 gets mighty heavy after about the 25th day. If you wanna get um with just one round, make it a nuke and get um all.........

rhinoman
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 58
(1/28/03 1:02:54 pm)
Reply Re: Regarding...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've heard the M-14 is under consideration. They've still got a bunch of em. If we go to war in the desert and there's ground fighting we're going to find out how ineffective the .223 is! Maybe. See, they'll use the three shot burst and well, that'll do the trick. So we may end up hearing how EFFECTIVE the .223 was?
I wonder how much poorer the average GI shoots now than in 1940? They don't teach marksmanship that much in todays army. If your a lousy shot, what's better three .223's or one .308? I would say three .223's. There's talk of equiping some of the more elite soldiers (Rangers) with the M-14. Another option is one per squad. Can you see this.... How come he gets the good rifle and we get these pee-shooters?
The fight for freedom is not fought overseas in distant lands with guns, missles and bombs. It is fought here with words, pen and paper and I fear, we are loosing it.

MO JENKINS
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 178
(1/30/03 11:06:05 pm)
Reply "TWIST"????
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the AR-180 and AR-15 rifles were being developed, they were first given a 1-14" twist.They were almost immediately changed to a 1-13" twist. My first AR-180 had a 1-13" twist. In theory this created the "yaw" which was supposed to help compensate for the .223 being a much smaller round. Over the years the yaw and related terminal effect of the round have been compromised to enhance accuracy and penetration. IMHO they have pretty much lost everything. Still wouldn't want to get hit with one.....I definately have more faith in the 7.62x39.... Then again, I'm ALWAYS wrong, just ask my wife.....

Maybe it's time for the armed forces to re-evaluate the AR10 and see if it can't be brought up to date and made acceptable for the grunts. Sounds like we're trying to use a rapier when a claymore is more advisable.
"Keep Off The Ridgeline"

Latest Article

The Firearms Forum is on online community for all gun enthusiasts. Join us to discuss firearms of all kinds, gun accessories, legal issues and more. Membership is free and we welcome all types of shooters, whether you're a novice or a pro. Come for the info, stay and make some friends.